Trupia Laura, Parry Tony, Neves Luis C, Lo Presti Davide
Nottingham Transportation Engineering Centre (NTEC), Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.
Int J Life Cycle Assess. 2017;22(6):972-985. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1203-9. Epub 2016 Oct 1.
Although the impact of road pavement surface condition on rolling resistance has been included in the life cycle assessment (LCA) framework of several studies in the last years, there is still a high level of uncertainty concerning the methodological assumptions and the parameters that can affect the results. In order to adopt pavement carbon footprint/LCA as a decision-making tool, it is necessary to explore the impact of the chosen methods and assumptions on the LCA results.
This paper provides a review of the main models describing the impact of the pavement surface properties on vehicle fuel consumption and analyses the influence of the methodological assumptions related to the rolling resistance on the LCA results. It compares the CO emissions, calculated with two different rolling resistance models existing in literature, and performs a sensitivity test on some specific input variables (pavement deterioration rate, traffic growth, and emission factors/fuel efficiency improvement).
The model used to calculate the impact of the pavement surface condition on fuel consumption significantly affects the LCA results. The pavement deterioration rate influences the calculation in both models, while traffic growth and fuel efficiency improvement have a limited impact on the vehicle CO emissions resulting from the pavement condition contribution to rolling resistance.
Existing models linking pavement condition to rolling resistance and hence vehicle emissions are not broadly applicable to the use phase of road pavement LCA and further research is necessary before a widely-used methodology can be defined. The methods of modelling and the methodological assumptions need to be transparent in the analysis of the impact of the pavement surface condition on fuel consumption, in order to be interpreted by decision makers and implemented in an LCA framework. This will be necessary before product category rules (PCR) for pavement LCA can be extended to include the use phase.
尽管近年来多项研究的生命周期评估（LCA）框架已纳入路面表面状况对滚动阻力的影响，但在方法假设和可能影响结果的参数方面仍存在高度不确定性。为了将路面碳足迹/LCA用作决策工具，有必要探究所选方法和假设对LCA结果的影响。
本文综述了描述路面特性对车辆燃油消耗影响的主要模型，并分析了与滚动阻力相关的方法假设对LCA结果的影响。比较了根据文献中现有的两种不同滚动阻力模型计算出的一氧化碳排放量，并对一些特定输入变量（路面损坏率、交通增长以及排放因子/燃油效率提高）进行了敏感性测试。
用于计算路面表面状况对燃油消耗影响的模型对LCA结果有显著影响。路面损坏率在两种模型中均影响计算，而交通增长和燃油效率提高对因路面状况导致滚动阻力而产生的车辆一氧化碳排放影响有限。
将路面状况与滚动阻力以及车辆排放联系起来的现有模型在道路路面LCA的使用阶段并不广泛适用，在定义广泛使用的方法之前还需要进一步研究。在分析路面表面状况对燃油消耗的影响时，建模方法和方法假设需要透明，以便决策者能够理解并在LCA框架中实施。在路面LCA的产品类别规则（PCR）能够扩展到包括使用阶段之前，这将是必要的。
